Policy talk:Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement guidelines: Difference between revisions
Latest comment: 11 days ago by GVarnum-WMF in topic Help needed
Content deleted Content added
→"See definition on Meta": new section |
GVarnum-WMF (talk | contribs) →Help needed: Reply |
||
| (143 intermediate revisions by 54 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{User:LincolnBot/archiveconfig |
|||
== Scope == |
|||
|archive = Policy talk:Universal Code of Conduct/Enforcement guidelines/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
|algo = old(180d) |
|||
|counter = 1 |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|||
|archiveheader = {{talk archive}} |
|||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|||
}}{{Universal Code of Conduct/Talk}} |
|||
== Opt Out? Seriously == |
|||
The UCoC has a role as an optional fallback for those projects which don't have their own standards. Attempting to impose it on large, established communities such as English Wikipedia against consensus is just another power grab which will drive away editors. [[User:Certes|Certes]] ([[User talk:Certes|talk]]) 10:26, 11 September 2022 (UTC) |
|||
Any website that forces you to opt-out of unsolicited e-mails can go screw itself. What is this, 2001? Change this process immediately and stop bothering people who DO NOT CARE. This account is retired anyway. [[User:Shadow2|Shadow2]] ([[User talk:Shadow2|talk]]) 00:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Voting results are in == |
|||
:100%, allow large wikis a ratification vote. This should be in each wiki's usual format (on en-wiki and I suspect on most others that means a community initiated, written, and closed RFC). If they ratify it, cool, we dotted is and crossed ts. If they don't, we dodge a minefield where communities are asked to abide by/enforce standards that don't have consensus. [[User:Tazerdadog|Tazerdadog]] ([[User talk:Tazerdadog|talk]]) 14:30, 11 September 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:Note that UCoC itself is already approved as a global policy (see [[:foundation:Universal Code of Conduct]]), and it technically already applies at all Wikimedia wikis. The discussion here is about the enforcement guidelines, rather than UCoC itself. [[User:Martin Urbanec|Martin Urbanec]] ([[User talk:Martin Urbanec|talk]]) 17:50, 11 September 2022 (UTC) |
|||
This message is ''only'' for people who forgot to add the voting information page to their watchlist. Voting results for the UCOC Enforcement Guidelines have been [[m:Universal_Code_of_Conduct/Revised_enforcement_guidelines/Voting_statistics|published]]. 76% support, 24% oppose. Personally, I'm satisfied with the results. [[User:Adrianmn1110|Adrianmn1110]] ([[User talk:Adrianmn1110|talk]]) 20:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Enforcement by type of violations == |
|||
:I am surprised that there is 24% oppose. We should analyze deeply what things make them say NO with the UCoC. [[User:Alphama|<span style="background:#16BCDA;color:white;border-radius:4px;"> <b>A</b> l p h a m a </span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Alphama|Talk]]</sup> 10:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC) |
|||
There is nothing directly specifying UCoC violations by WMF staff & contractors, BOT, Working Groups or Committees. While its highly unlikely that people in some of the roles would cause an issue, its only fair that there be some recourse mentioned in this section for those areas. Aka Affcom oversees affiliates but who oversees Affcom, what if the Language committee denies a language because of racism, or a funding committee denies a community/individual without cause or places impractical conditions on a grant forcing it to be withdrawn/denied ? The current layout appears to create a set of untouchables in the movement. [[User:Gnangarra|Gnangarra]] ([[User talk:Gnangarra|talk]]) 12:27, 11 September 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== What is the content of the training and is it public ? == |
|||
== "See definition on Meta" == |
|||
I am a bit lost regarding the concrete nature of the training. Is there or will there be some material (like online documents, videos, etc.) that will somehow fix the content of the training. Would that material be public ? [[User:Dominic Mayers|Dominic Mayers]] ([[User talk:Dominic Mayers|talk]]) 00:11, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
As the link points to the '''definition on''' Meta, not Meta('s main page?) itself, the linked text should be "definition" or "definition on Meta". The current linking style is discouraged by dewiki and enwiki ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Piped_link#Transparency], [https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verlinken#Gut_zielen]). [[User:ToBeFree|ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 19:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC) |
|||
: OK, I just realized that the training is not yet elaborated. It is something planned. In my view, this is the most important part. [[User:Dominic Mayers|Dominic Mayers]] ([[User talk:Dominic Mayers|talk]]) 12:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Help needed == |
|||
From point '''3.1.2 Enforcement by type of violations''' the text has not been translated in Dutch. I'm willing to give a hand, but the legal American english terms are too complicated to translate on my own. Also because I can't find the basic explanations of the drafting committee. So there's a need for support from some other people, with a more than moderate understanding of the english language and Dutch and American legal terms. Thanks! [[User:VanArtevelde|VanArtevelde]] ([[User talk:VanArtevelde|talk]]) 18:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I am pinging a recent Dutch translators (@[[User:HanV|HanV]]) in case they are able to help or have any input. At some point, we are hoping to have some of the organization's translators get involved and help out - but that is likely months/years away - and I am not 100% sure if Dutch is a language we have in that system just yet. Thank you both! --[[User:GVarnum-WMF|Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him]]] ([[User talk:GVarnum-WMF|talk]]) 20:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I see that 3.1.2 Enforcement guidelines is only partly translated to dutch. If that is an important part of the documentation, i am willing to translated it. At the moment i choose first translating the fuzzy translations, second for the pages that are partly translated and at last for messagegroups that almost translated. Sometimes i translated real old things, but then it is more clear if something changes. |
|||
::Maar om in het Nederlands verder te gaan, het is goed dat een meer officieel stuk door meerdere personen met kennis van die taal wordt gelezen en dat het gebruik van termen in ieder geval consequent is en inhoudelijk gelijk aan het origineel. Het vertalen is lastig omdat je bijvoorbeeld zowel de term UCOC, Universal Code of Conduct als de vertaling Universele Gedragscode wilt gebruiken. Voor de leesbaarheid doe ik dat dan bovenin en gebruik ik later alleen maar Gedragscode. Maar het belangrijkste is natuurlijk om inhoudelijk gelijk te blijven en dan blijf je natuurlijk houden dat het wettelijk anders kan liggen in een land of dat we als vertalers het verkeerd begrijpen. [[User:HanV|HanV]] ([[User talk:HanV|talk]]) 15:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thank you, @[[User:HanV|HanV]]! We greatly appreciate your translation efforts. :) --[[User:GVarnum-WMF|Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him]]] ([[User talk:GVarnum-WMF|talk]]) 16:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 16:50, 8 May 2024
 | This page is for discussions related to the page. Please remember to:
Discussion navigation:
Archives: 1 |
Opt Out? Seriously
Any website that forces you to opt-out of unsolicited e-mails can go screw itself. What is this, 2001? Change this process immediately and stop bothering people who DO NOT CARE. This account is retired anyway. Shadow2 (talk) 00:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Voting results are in
This message is only for people who forgot to add the voting information page to their watchlist. Voting results for the UCOC Enforcement Guidelines have been published. 76% support, 24% oppose. Personally, I'm satisfied with the results. Adrianmn1110 (talk) 20:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am surprised that there is 24% oppose. We should analyze deeply what things make them say NO with the UCoC. A l p h a m a Talk 10:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
What is the content of the training and is it public ?
I am a bit lost regarding the concrete nature of the training. Is there or will there be some material (like online documents, videos, etc.) that will somehow fix the content of the training. Would that material be public ? Dominic Mayers (talk) 00:11, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- OK, I just realized that the training is not yet elaborated. It is something planned. In my view, this is the most important part. Dominic Mayers (talk) 12:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Help needed
From point 3.1.2 Enforcement by type of violations the text has not been translated in Dutch. I'm willing to give a hand, but the legal American english terms are too complicated to translate on my own. Also because I can't find the basic explanations of the drafting committee. So there's a need for support from some other people, with a more than moderate understanding of the english language and Dutch and American legal terms. Thanks! VanArtevelde (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- I am pinging a recent Dutch translators (@HanV) in case they are able to help or have any input. At some point, we are hoping to have some of the organization's translators get involved and help out - but that is likely months/years away - and I am not 100% sure if Dutch is a language we have in that system just yet. Thank you both! --Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 20:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I see that 3.1.2 Enforcement guidelines is only partly translated to dutch. If that is an important part of the documentation, i am willing to translated it. At the moment i choose first translating the fuzzy translations, second for the pages that are partly translated and at last for messagegroups that almost translated. Sometimes i translated real old things, but then it is more clear if something changes.
- Maar om in het Nederlands verder te gaan, het is goed dat een meer officieel stuk door meerdere personen met kennis van die taal wordt gelezen en dat het gebruik van termen in ieder geval consequent is en inhoudelijk gelijk aan het origineel. Het vertalen is lastig omdat je bijvoorbeeld zowel de term UCOC, Universal Code of Conduct als de vertaling Universele Gedragscode wilt gebruiken. Voor de leesbaarheid doe ik dat dan bovenin en gebruik ik later alleen maar Gedragscode. Maar het belangrijkste is natuurlijk om inhoudelijk gelijk te blijven en dan blijf je natuurlijk houden dat het wettelijk anders kan liggen in een land of dat we als vertalers het verkeerd begrijpen. HanV (talk) 15:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, @HanV! We greatly appreciate your translation efforts. :) --Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 16:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)